Home / SecondAmendment
Showing posts with label SecondAmendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SecondAmendment. Show all posts
NJ judge says that even blind person has the right to own guns

NJ judge says that even blind person has the right to own guns

So apparently you don't lose your rights when you are blind.  From CBS 2 News in New York:


. . .  That episode began a legal battle that wound up in Morris County Superior Court. Prosecutors argued Hopler shouldn’t have guns because he’s a danger. However, a judge ruled otherwise, saying his disability shouldn’t take away his constitutional right to bear arms.
Robert Trautman is Hopler’s attorney, and said police singled out his client.
“The state argued that Steve drinks too much.” Trautman said. “It’s just simply that the police didn’t want Steve Hopler to own firearms because he’s blind and they felt that was improper.” . . .
Brady Campaign supports ban on gun shows

Brady Campaign supports ban on gun shows

When I debate the Brady Campaign they say that they don't support gun bans, but every time a gun ban comes up they are supporting it. In this case, the original federal appeals court decision struck down the gun ban, but I assume that the very liberal 9th circuit appeals court case will reverse this. From the San Jose Mercury News:

Before the end of this year, Russell and Sallie Nordyke will set up shop for at least five gun shows at the Santa Clara County, Calif., fairgrounds, providing a gathering spot for thousands of gun enthusiasts to buy and sell rifles, pistols and other weapons.
For the California couple, the southern San Francisco Bay Area is a small island amid a sea of hostility toward their TS Gun Shows. Nearby counties have enacted laws that forbid the sale or possession of guns on government property, effectively banning gun shows at some of the best spots to hold them.
The Nordykes believe those laws are unconstitutional - and on Monday, a federal appeals court will once again take up their 12-year quest to strike down the regulations.
The case offers another crucial test of Second Amendment rights that could have repercussions for California's sweeping slate of state and local gun control laws.
Specifically, an 11-judge 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel is to hear arguments in the Nordykes' legal challenge to Alameda County's ordinance, which has outlawed gun shows at the fairgrounds in Pleasanton, Calif., since 1999.
"It has impacted our lives tremendously," Sallie Nordyke said. "We used to be able to have gun shows in a lot of other places."
With gun rights groups such as the National Rifle Association on one side and gun control advocates such as the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence on the other, the Nordyke case is being closely watched across the country. . . .

Where do Americans stand on Concealed Carry Laws?



Angus-Reid Survey: 59% of Americans support either a right-to-carry law (51%) or a "Vermont" style rule (8%) that doesn't require a permit. Even 50% of Democrats and 50% of non-gun owners fall in this category.

There was also this question. The answer to it raises the question of what the reaction would have been if the 4 Justice minority on the court had their way with the Heller and McDonald decisions. These four justices don't even represent the views of Democrats.

Remember how Chicago murder rate fell last year? Well, don't look to arrests for murder being the cause

Remember how Chicago murder rate fell last year? Well, don't look to arrests for murder being the cause

"Only 30 Percent Of Last Year’s Murders Have Been Solved"

Murders in Chicago were down last year, but it’s a different story when it comes to the number of murders actually solved.

As WBBM Newsradio’s Steve Miller reports, the murder clearance rate – the number of homicides that were solved the same year – has slipped. . . .
"D.C. Ordered to Pay $1M in Historic Gun Case"

"D.C. Ordered to Pay $1M in Historic Gun Case"

Alan Gottlieb was asking for $3.1 million, but it is nice to see that they got some of their costs covered. From Fox News:

The District of Columbia has been ordered to pay more than $1 million in attorneys' fees as a result of a historic gun case that was ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Dick Heller sued the city in 2003 over its ban on handgun ownership and the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ban in June 2008, saying it violated the Second Amendment.
A federal judge on Thursday issued an opinion awarding Heller's attorneys $1,137,072.27 in fees and expenses. The attorneys had argued they should be awarded $3.1 million. Attorneys for the city said the figure should be closer to $840,000.
A spokesman for the D.C. Office of the Attorney General said city lawyers were studying the opinion. A telephone message left for Heller's lead lawyer, Alan Gura, wasn't immediately returned. The judge's opinion awards Gura approximately $662,000 for more than 1,500 hours of work on the case, paying him at a rate of $420 per hour. Five other members of Heller's team are also compensated. . . .
Copy of Heller v. DC Appeals Court Decision from yesterday

Copy of Heller v. DC Appeals Court Decision from yesterday

A copy of the decision is available here. Unfortunately, intermediate scrutiny is adopted here (p. 24): "the District must show they are 'substantially related to an important governmental objective.'” Holbrook may have made a big mistake in not arguing empirical issues here.

We think the District has advanced, albeit incompletely — almost cursorily — articulated, two important governmental interests it may have in the registration requirements, viz., to protect police officers and to aid in crime control. Cf. United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 750 (1987) (“the Government’s general interest in preventing crime is compelling”). The Council Committee on Public Safety explained: “Registration is critical because it ... allows officers to determine in advance whether individuals involved in a call may have firearms ... [and] assists law enforcement in determining whether registered owners are eligible to possess firearms or have fallen into a prohibited class.”


This should have been a slam-dunk case empirically. Crimes do not get solved this way.

Handgun registration -- After the decision on Friday, D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson claimed: "Because law-abiding citizens register their guns, it makes it easier for the police to identify and arrest the criminals." Despite the inaccuracies show on television shows, registration doesn’t work to solve crimes. In theory, if a gun is registered and it is left at the scene, it could theoretically be traced back to the owner. But guns from crimes are virtually never left at the scene of the crime. When they are left at the scene, it is primarily in cases where the criminal has been seriously wounded or killed. Then, of course, the weapon is not needed to catch the perpetrator. Moreover, in the few cases guns are left at the scene, they are traced back to somebody else because the criminals never bothered to register their guns. . . .


As an aside, it hasn't gone over very well in Canada.
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)